Talk to me about Pathfinder

So continuing my ongoing mission to expand my horizons I have recently stumbled across Pathfinder. From my understanding it is a version of dnd that was made when people revolted over 4e and continued 3.5e. So are there any thoughts out there about the system? Do you prefer it to its DnD rivals (3.5, 4 and 5e)? What do you like? What do you hate?

Pathfinder rules. It is a logical evolution of D&D 3.5, and is basically the homerules of Paizo, who were major publishers of amazing Adventure Paths for 3.5. it was the best selling RPG for most of the years where WOTC published 4e.

Their system world, Golarion, is really great, too.

For my money, Pathfinder’s greatest strength is also its greatest weakness. There are so many details that go into building a character, with feats and skills and many many many class and race options depending on what the DM allows for source texts. Combat is very detailed and numbers-intensive. And honestly, I like that. But it seems pretty easy to break the system if you put a little effort into it and the DM isn’t watching carefully. My favorite Pathfinder games have been those where the DM restricts source material, so the party spends less time on hyper-optimized character builds and more time just getting to the game.

Pathfinder cleaned up a lot of the fiddly complexity and unintended wombo-combos of D&D 3.5, and it preserved the more character-oriented aspects of fantasy roleplaying during the gamified cooldown-management of the D&D 4E era. It served a really important role in catering to those who weren't happy with the direction 4E took.

That said, I can't see a compelling reason to play Pathfinder when D&D 5E exists. It's not that Pathfinder is bad, it's just that 5E is very much in the same vein, but does everything better.

Which is the polar opposite of the game we just started haha. Hope you end up liking it!

Pathfinder, to me, is at its best at the character creation stage. As noted by others there's an amazing amount of material out there to help spark your imagination and give you interesting ways to implement your ideas. That being said, I firmly believe you can create most (or all) of the same characters in nearly any system, you just need to be creative and have a DM that's willing to work with you.

It also has a huge number of pre-written adventure paths for DMs that aren't as creative or just plain don't have time to write their own stuff. This, and the fact that the rules/materials are basically free to access online, are the main reasons I've seen people play it.

The downsides for me come in at level 10+ or so. Once you get that high it gets excessively crunchy, even for my groups that enjoy the crunch. There are amazingly complex situations you can find yourself in that give you bonuses and negatives to your rolls, and it just gets silly. There's a reason some people call it "Mathfinder".

Saying one or the other is "better" is clearly a matter of opinion, but my opinion is that it is improved upon 3.5e. I never played 4e. 5e is definitely a more streamlined system that is easier to run and learn imo, but to some it lacks depth. They both have their place in my mind, it just depends on what you're looking for.

Ha! I'm sure it'll be great -- the PBP format lends itself to more RP, which balances the hyper-optimization concerns more. I've been through two major (1st-18th/20th) Pathfinder campaigns. One was "anything Paizo goes" and the other was "CRB and Advanced Player's Guide" plus a few homebrew rules. I liked the latter one better, but my regular group is very combat-oriented, and not much in the way of RP.
I'll second both of these statements. I'm lucky in that the DM for my online real-time group has automated a huge amount of the math involved, but if you don't have that, there's a lot to keep track of. I've only played a bit of 5e, but I found character creation to be a bit flat compared to Pathfinder, even with a limited set of options.

In my experience with my own IRL groups, every player makes woefully inadequate combat PCs, instead opting to explore some weird combination of attributes. I've literally had to give them free bonuses to keep them alive against appropriate CRs.

1. Character customization possibilities are insane. There are so many books and options within those books that you can create nearly anything at all.

2. It's can be overwhelming mathematically, with tons of little bonuses here and there, some of which stack and some of which don't.

3. The rules are very comprehensive. While this creates a great framework for telling many kinds of stories, it can both slow the game down and restrict outside-the-box thinking.

4. They have a lot of pre-written modules, so there are a lot of different types of campaigns you can run depending on your style of gaming.

I have been reading it ocer and from a GM and player standpoint I love how fleshed out the world and character options are. I'll need to keep an eye out for a game.

Edit: The more I look it over the more I want to play a game. I think I might just roll up a random character to see how easy something is to put together.

Pathfinder does some things I like, and some things which annoys me.

Good:
• Made every classes relevant.
• Got rid of dead levels.
• Made epic levels which didn't sucked.
• Streamlined feats which desperately needed it.
• Turned many old 3.X classes into archetypes instead limiting the huge lists of classes available and making it more manageable.

Bad:
• Some weird skill choices (why do I learn a new language each time I want to get better at deciphering scripts?).
• Turned all the classes "up to 11".
• Some weird feat choices (like why splitting Improved trip/disarm/bullrush/etc. into 2 feats instead? they already worked the way they were...).
• A bit too many bonuses for my taste...
• Some of those archetypes are WEIRD...

From what I have been reading as well the classes seemed to be waaaay more effective which is what I am guessing you mean by turned up to 11 Kalajel. For example, I ended up making a half-orc druid that hung out in the Katapesh desert on his own. As a level one character, this guy could pretty much survive and navigate in the desert with his animal companion (a camel) except for food as required. If he settled down, he could easily build an oasis and shelter himself with very little equipement. Not only that but he could grow a type of magical healing berry, which I could see him selling or trading for any equipment he might need. Now the RP options with this guy have me basically salivating and once again this is at level one.

Yeah, when I think of a 1st level D&D-like character, I don't picture someone who can do all that. At 5th level, maybe, but 1st? I think they gave each classes too many goodies...

This is all assuming that I haven't read something incorrectly...

Just to give you an example of the higher level complexity I mentioned, I made a cheat sheet today for our ranged character in my home game. He is Level 11 with one level of Bard and 10 levels of Ranger.



Edit: here's a link since the embedded image is too small to read.

Sounds like a game that begs for a VTT

Yeah okay thats pretty crunchy. Still though might be worth it to play characters turned up to 11.

This could be handy for you!

Awesome! Thanks so much!

I just bought that bundle, too. Mostly to get Starfinder, but also for the Shattered Star adventure path and all the great Golarion setting books.

I'm running a Shattered Star game right now. Super moderate spoilers that don't really ruin anything, but: It's fun though, we're in Book 4